A Scoping Review of Joint Protection Programs for People with Hand Arthritis

Bobos, Pavlos; Nazari, Goris; Lalone, Emily A.; Ferreira, Louis M.; Grewal, Ruby; MacDermid, Joy C.

doi:10.2174/1874325001812010500

Cited by 5 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 44 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…JP effectiveness has been supported by systematic reviews. 6 7 14 Therefore, our finding that only 10 had participated in suggests that there is a substantial gap in awareness, delivery and accessibility of these programmes.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 89%

“… 6 JP involve training on ‘safer movement patterns, the use of adaptive devices (eg, built up handles, hands free technologies) and behaviour modifications (eg, activities to avoid, pacing) during physical activity. 6 However, JP can be implemented in many different ways, and patient preferences are rarely reported as being considered in programme design. There are many unknown barriers that may reduce participation in JP programmes, and these may be related to personal beliefs, preferences or circumstances.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…5 Joint protection (JP) is a self-management strategy for patients living with arthritis to help preserve joint function and reduce pain. 6 JP involve training on 'safer movement patterns, the use of adaptive devices (eg, built up handles, hands free technologies) and behaviour modifications (eg, activities to avoid, pacing) during physical activity. 6 However, JP can be implemented in many different ways, and patient preferences are rarely reported as being considered in programme design.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Barriers, facilitators, preferences and expectations of joint protection programmes for patients with hand arthritis: a cross-sectional survey

et al. 2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectivesThe objective of this survey was to investigate the barriers, facilitators, expectations and patient preferences regarding joint protection (JP) programmes in people with hand arthritis.DesignCross-sectional survey.SettingTertiary clinic.ParticipantsPatients with hand arthritis: osteoarthritis, rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis and other forms of arthritis.Primary and secondary outcome measuresThis study used a survey among people with hand arthritis. Descriptive statistics and percentages were reported for all the data about the barriers, facilitators and preferences around JP.ResultsA total of 192 patients consented to participate. Most of the patients (82%) were unaware of JP. Factors that may act as barriers to participation and were regarded as ‘a very big concern’ were: cost of the programme (44%), time of offering the programme (39%), work commitments (36%) and having a centre/clinic close to the house (28%). Factors that may act as facilitators and rated as ‘extremely helpful’ were: research that shows that JP works (26%) and having the centre/clinic close to the house (25%). An online format for JP was the most preferred option (54%). Half (46%) preferred a timeframe of 1 hour, three times per week and 44% preferred a 2-hour programme, for three times per week.ConclusionsAwareness of the potential benefits of JP, and prior experience with JP programme were very low. Common potentially modifiable patient-reported barriers to participate in future JP interventions, included: cost, work commitments, distance from home to clinic and times that the intervention were provided. These barriers might be addressed with free and accessible forms of delivery of JP, which may lead to better uptake and participation in JP programmes.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 89%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Barriers, facilitators, preferences and expectations of joint protection programmes for patients with hand arthritis: a cross-sectional survey

et al. 2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, a successful return to pre-injury levels of occupational performance following DRF is multifactorial and not simply a result of eliminating impairment (Chung & Mathews, 2015;Fang et al, 2020;Jayakumar et al, 2020;MacDermid et al, 2001). Age, gender, mechanism of injury, severity of injury, education, socioeconomic status, emotional status, social support, and compensability represent person and environment factors that have been shown to influence the rate of recovery and degree of return to preinjury level of occupational performance (Bobos et al, 2018;Fang et al, 2020;Modarresi et al, 2019;Truong et al, 2017). The extent to which these factors enable or inhibit occupational performance, and if/how they are recognised and addressed during the typical hand therapy intervention in Australia have yet to be clarified.…”

Section: • Hand Therapy Interventions Predominantlymentioning

confidence: 99%

Current clinical practice patterns and perspectives of Australian hand therapists during the treatment of adults with distal radius fracture: A national survey

Bredy,

Patterson,

Glasgow

2023

Aus Occup Therapy J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionSuccessful return to pre‐injury occupational performance following distal radius fracture (DRF) may be influenced by person and environment factors such as pain, age, social support, and socioeconomic status. The primary aim of this study was to explore Australian hand therapists' current clinical practice and determine whether they consider these factors during the management of DRF.MethodsA mixed methods online survey was distributed to members of the Australian Hand Therapy Association. Descriptive statistics were used to examine the quantitative data, and the qualitative data were analysed by content analysis.ResultsOf the 120 members who completed the survey, 68% were occupational therapists and 32% were physiotherapists with 74% in the private and 26% in the public health‐care setting. Most factors perceived to influence recovery were consistent with person factors and a biomechanical approach. Other factors related to occupational performance, such as social and leisure skills, environment and culture were reported less often. When asked about defining occupational performance, the key categories identified through qualitative open responses were ‘performing meaningful activities/occupations’, ‘performing work/employment’, and ‘completing activities/function’.ConclusionThe data suggest that hand therapists in Australia primarily identify person factors as key to recovery after DRF. Context and environmental factors that influence occupational performance did not appear to be considered as often during treatment or when defining occupational performance. Further research is needed to explore the contextual and environmental factors that influence hand therapy intervention and determine whether they play a role in the successful return to pre‐injury occupational performance following DRF.Consumer and community involvementThe survey was conceptualised by the research team, which included two experienced hand therapists and piloted with 10 consumers. Hand therapists (consumers) of various years of experience and discipline (i.e., occupational therapy and physiotherapy) provided feedback to improve the survey in terms of content, comprehensibility, and length. No clients/patients of hand therapists were involved in the development of the survey or the study, and the consumers of the study were considered hand therapists.

show abstract

“…10 The rationale for providing this education is to optimise joint congruency during functional use, decrease inflammation, decrease pain and increase independence, which also optimises the patient's psychological response to their condition. 11…”

Section: Educationmentioning

confidence: 99%